From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: widen vacuum buffer counters |
Date: | 2020-01-31 22:13:53 |
Message-ID: | 4969.1580508833@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> We recently noticed that vacuum buffer counters wraparound in extreme
> cases, with ridiculous results.
Ugh.
> I propose to backpatch this.
+1 for widening these counters, but since they're global variables, -0.2
or so for back-patching. I don't know of any reason that an extension
would be touching these, but I feel like the problem isn't severe enough
to justify taking an ABI-break risk.
Also, %zd is the wrong format code for int64. Recommended practice
these days is to use "%lld" with an explicit cast of the printf argument
to long long (just to be sure). That doesn't work safely before v12,
and if you did insist on back-patching further, you'd need to jump
through hoops to avoid having platform-specific format codes in a
translatable string. (The side-effects for translation seem like
an independent argument against back-patching.)
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-01-31 22:28:16 | Re: PATCH: Fix wrong size argument to pg_strncasecmp |
Previous Message | legrand legrand | 2020-01-31 21:59:48 | Re: WIP: Aggregation push-down |